‘We the Prisoners’: The Demise of the Fourth Amendment


KenK's picture

That hoary old parchement doesn't mean a fucking thing since about the time of the Whiskey Rebellion (1792).

KenK's picture

People need to quit referring to it like it was a real thing.

KenK's picture

The only rights a person has are what counter parties agree to or what they can enforce themselves.

Samarami's picture

Both your above comments regarding John Whitehead's commentary meet soundly with my agreement.

1) People, especially "anarchists", need to "...quit referring to it like it was a real thing...", like "it" was a living, breathing entity.

I believe "libertarian" writers (quotes intended and necessary) need to spend a few hours reading the late Delmar England's "Mind and Matters" to learn how devastating to liberty the inclination toward reification amounts to. "Mind and Matters" is long, it's arduous -- difficult to comprehend. But, once I began (and learned to read between the lines to grasp the concepts) I could not put it down. I began to see why "libertarians" so often whine and moan and lament over lack of adherents to our "philosophy".

2) The concept of "rights" has generated much bickering and squabbling among us. To me, its use implies "jurisdiction" of some type that I do not believe exists. Therefore, I don't use the term. I could be wrong about that. I thought I was wrong once, then discovered my error. :-).

But I agree with you -- "rights" are only what we agree to -- and can "enforce". The man with the loaded gun indeed has "rights" (or woman, L-rd have mercy).